Sensitization and allergy to Cannabis sativa leaves in a population of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum)-sensitized patients

Trips Through the Skin: Reviewing Cutaneous Drug Reactions to Psychedelics and Hallucinogens

Although psychedelic and hallucinogenic substances have gained popularity for therapeutic use, their dermatologic adverse effects are poorly characterized. This review characterizes the cutaneous reactions associated with psychedelic and hallucinogenic drugs. A review of PubMed and Scopus was conducted from the inception of databases to August 31, 2023. Search terms included drug names and classes (cannabis, MDMA, ecstasy, 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine, psychedelics, hallucinogens, peyote, marijuana, lysergic acid diethylamide, LSD, ketamine, dimethyltryptamine, DMT, phencyclidine, PCP, dextromethorphan, psilocybin, and ayahuasca), and dermatosis terms (dermatitis, contact dermatitis, drug eruption, skin reaction, and urticaria). Studies were included if there was an association with a psychedelic or hallucinogenic and any cutaneous reaction; studies without both components were excluded. Twenty-two studies met inclusion criteria, describing reactions to cannabis (10 studies), MDMA (5 studies), ketamine (4 studies), and psilocybin (3 studies). Forty total patients were included. Among cannabis-related reactions, the most common reaction was type I hypersensitivity by topical exposure (n = 21). Three patients reported type IV hypersensitivity reactions to contact with cannabis or cannabis-derived oils, all of whom experienced vesicular contact dermatitis. Two additional patients presented with an erythema-multiforme-like reaction and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis after systemic administration, respectively. MDMA was associated with acneiform eruptions (2 cases), an urticarial eruption, a guttate psoriasis-like reaction, a fixed drug eruption, and Stevens-Johnson syndrome (1 case). Four patients reported type I hypersensitivity reactions to ketamine. Four patients reported vesicular eruptions, cyanosis, or widespread jaundice to psilocybin. Of the cases, 8 patients had cutaneous reactions that resolved with drug cessation, 10 resolved with cessation plus treatment, and resolution in 7 cases was not reported. Zero studies were found describing other psychedelic or hallucinogenic compounds. Further research is required to characterize reactions and treatments linked to the variety of extant psychedelics and hallucinogens.

Proteomics-Based Approach for Detailing the Allergenic Profile of Cannabis Chemotypes

Allergic sensitization to cannabis is an emerging public health concern and is difficult to clinically establish owing to lack of standardized diagnostic approaches. Attempts to develop diagnostic tools were largely hampered by the Schedule I restrictions on cannabis, which limited accessibility for research. Recently, however, hemp was removed from the classified list, and increased accessibility to hemp allows for the evaluation of its practical clinical value for allergy diagnosis. We hypothesized that the proteomic profile is preserved across different cannabis chemotypes and that hemp would be an ideal source of plant material for clinical testing. Using a proteomics-based approach, we examined whether distinct varieties of cannabis plant contain relevant allergens of cannabis. Cannabis extracts were generated from high tetrahydrocannabinol variety (Mx), high cannabidiol variety (V1-19) and mixed profile variety (B5) using a Plant Total Protein Extraction Kit. Hemp extracts were generated using other standardized methods. Protein samples were subjected to nanoscale tandem mass spectrometry. Acquired peptides sequences were examined against the Cannabis sativa database to establish protein identity. Non-specific lipid transfer protein (Can s 3) level was measured using a recently developed ELISA 2.0 assay. Proteomic analysis identified 49 distinct potential allergens in protein extracts from all chemotypes. Most importantly, clinically relevant and validated allergens, such as profilin (Can s 2), Can s 3 and Bet v 1-domain-containing protein 10 (Can s 5), were identified in all chemotypes at label-free quantification (LFP) intensities > 106. However, the oxygen evolving enhancer protein 2 (Can s 4) was not detected in any of the protein samples. Similarly, Can s 2, Can s 3 and Can s 5 peptides were also detected in hemp protein extracts. The validation of these findings using the ELISA 2.0 assay indicated that hemp extract contains 30-37 ng of Can s 3 allergen per µg of total protein. Our proteomic studies indicate that relevant cannabis allergens are consistently expressed across distinct cannabis chemotypes. Further, hemp may serve as an ideal practical substitute for clinical testing, since it expresses most allergens relevant to cannabis sensitization, including the validated major allergen Can s 3.

A review of cannabis allergy in the early days of legalization

Cannabis allergy is a burgeoning field; consequently, research is still in its infancy and allergists' knowledge surrounding this topic is limited. As cannabis legalization expands across the world, it is anticipated that there will be an increase in cannabis use. Thus, we hypothesize that a concomitant rise in the incidence of allergy to this plant can be expected. Initiatives aimed at properly educating health care professionals are therefore necessary. This review presents the most up-to-date information on a broad range of topics related to cannabis allergy. Although the clinical features of cannabis allergy are becoming more well described and recognized, the tools available to make a correct diagnosis are meager and often poorly accessible. In addition, research on cannabis allergy is still taking its first steps, and new and potentially groundbreaking findings in this field are expected to occur in the next few years. Finally, although therapeutic approaches are being developed, patient and physician education regarding cannabis allergy is certainly needed.

Establishing diagnostic strategies for cannabis allergy

INTRODUCTION

Cannabis is the most widely consumed illicit drug in the world and carries a risk of severe IgE-mediated allergic reactions, requiring appropriate diagnostic management. Currently available diagnostics are still relatively limited and require careful interpretation of results to avoid harmful over- and underdiagnosis.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on the most up-to-date understandings of cannabis allergy diagnosis, starting with the main clinical features of the disease and the allergenic characteristics of Cannabis sativa, and then providing insights into in vivo, in vitro, and ex vivo diagnostic tests.

EXPERT OPINION

At present, the diagnosis of IgE-mediated cannabis allergy is based on a three-step approach that starts with accurate history taking and ends with a confirmation of sensitization to the whole extract and, finally, molecular components. Although much has been discovered since its first description in 1971, the diagnosis of cannabis allergy still has many unmet needs. The lack of commercial standardized and validated extracts and in vitro assays makes a harmonized workup of cannabis allergy difficult. Furthermore, the epidemiological characteristics, and clinical implications of sensitization to different molecular components are not yet fully known. Future research will complete the picture and likely result in an individualized and standardized approach.

Cannabis-related allergies: An international overview and consensus recommendations

Cannabis is the most widely used recreational drug in the world. Cannabis sativa and Cannabis indica have been selectively bred to develop their psychoactive properties. The increasing use in many countries has been accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Cannabis can provoke both type 1 and type 4 allergic reactions. Officially recognized allergens include a pathogenesis-related class 10 allergen, profilin, and a nonspecific lipid transfer protein. Other allergens may also be relevant, and recognition of allergens may vary between countries and continents. Cannabis also has the potential to provoke allergic cross-reactions to plant foods. Since cannabis is an illegal substance in many countries, research has been hampered, leading to challenges in diagnosis since no commercial extracts are available for testing. Even in countries such as Canada, where cannabis is legalized, diagnosis may rely solely on the purchase of cannabis for prick-to-prick skin tests. Management consists of avoidance, with legal issues hindering the development of other treatments such as immunotherapy. Education of healthcare professionals is similarly lacking. This review aimed to summarize the current status of cannabis allergy and proposes recommendations for the future management of this global issue.

Cannabis-Associated Asthma and Allergies

Inhalation of cannabis smoke is its most common use and the pulmonary complications of its use may be the single most common form of drug-induced pulmonary disease worldwide. However, the role of cannabis consumption in asthma patients and allergic clinical situations still remains controversial. To review the evidence of asthma and allergic diseases associated with the use of marijuana, we conducted a search of English, Spanish, and Portuguese medical using the search terms asthma, allergy, marijuana, marihuana, and cannabis. Entries made between January 1970 and March 2017 were retrieved. Several papers have shown the relationship between marijuana use and increase in asthma and other allergic diseases symptoms, as well as the increased frequency of medical visits. This narrative review emphasizes the importance to consider cannabis as a precipitating factor for acute asthma and allergic attacks in clinical practice. Although smoking of marijuana may cause respiratory symptoms, there is a need for more studies to elucidate many aspects in allergic asthma patients, especially considering the long-term use of the drug. These patients should avoid using marijuana and be oriented about individual health risks, possible dangers of second-hand smoke exposure, underage use, safe storage, and the over smoking of marijuana.

Occupational cannabis exposure and allergy risks

Objectives

Cannabis allergy has mainly been described following recreational use but some cases also point to cannabis sensitisation as a result of occupational exposure. As a consequence, little is known on the prevalence and clinical phenotype of occupational cannabis allergy. Therefore, this study aims to explore the allergy-associated health risks of occupational cannabis exposure in Belgian police force personnel.

Methods

81 participants, active in the police force, reporting regular occupational cannabis exposure during the past 12 months, were included. History was combined with a standardised questionnaire on allergies and cannabis exposure.Basophil activation tests (BATs) with a crude cannabis extract and rCan s 3 were performed. In addition, specific (s)IgE rCan s 3 as well as sIgE to house dust mite, six pollen and three mould allergens were quantified.

Results

Although 42% of the participants reported respiratory and/or cutaneous symptoms on occupational cannabis exposure, all cannabis diagnostics were entirely negative, except one symptomatic case demonstrating a borderline result. Furthermore, there is no significant difference between the groups with and without symptoms on cannabis exposure in terms of allergenic sensitisations.

Conclusions

The origins of the reported respiratory and cutaneous symptoms during cannabis exposure remain elusive but are probably due to non-immune reactions. It should be noted that the study was volunteer-based possibly reflecting an excessive number of symptomatic individuals. Nevertheless, as only one participant reported using fully protective gear, much improvement is needed for reducing the number of symptoms reported on duty, independent of their origin.

Marijuana use is associated with hypersensitivity to multiple allergens in US adults

BACKGROUND

The recent legalization of marijuana use for both medical and recreational purposes in several states of the United Sates is expected to further increase the already high prevalence of marijuana use. Although allergic reactions are uncommon, the potential of marijuana use and cultivation to cause allergy should be considered. We aimed to investigate whether marijuana use is associated with the prevalence of sensitization to specific allergens.

METHODS

A total of 2671 adults (aged 20-59 years) who participated in the 2005-2006 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey were included. Participants completed a questionnaire on marijuana use and underwent sensitization tests to 19 specific allergens. Those who reported marijuana use for at least 1 day in the past 30 days were considered marijuana users.

RESULTS

No difference was found in the history of allergy between marijuana users and non-users. Compared with marijuana non-users as a reference group, the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) of sensitization to a specific allergen among marijuana users was significantly greater for antibodies against the following: Alternaria alternata (AOR=1.67; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-2.70), D. farinae (AOR=1.68; 95% CI, 1.27-2.22), D. pteronyssin (AOR=1.65; 95% CI, 1.32-2.06), ragweed (AOR=1.84; 95% CI, 1.30-2.59), rye grass (AOR=1.49; 95% CI, 1.12-1.97), Bermuda grass (AOR=1.55; 95% CI, 1.03-2.33), oak (AOR=1.76; 95% CI, 1.14-2.70), birch (AOR=2.09; 95% CI, 1.23-3.55), peanut (AOR=1.91; 95% CI, 1.25-2.92), and cat dander (AOR=1.51; 95% CI=1.13-2.03).

CONCLUSIONS

We provide preliminary findings to suggest that marijuana use is associated with sensitization to specific allergens, including molds, dust mites, plants, and cat dander.

[Cannabis and crossed allergy with food]

Cannabis use has increased over the last decade. At the same time, we see cannabis allergies appearing, ranging from simple rhinoconjunctivitis to anaphylactic-type reactions, some of which are severe since fatal cases have been described, but we also see allergic-induced food allergies cross-linked in the family of lipid transfer proteins (LTP). Indeed, cannabis contains an LTP called Can s 3. The LT are very widespread in the vegetable kingdom and are present in many vegetables and fruits. LTPs have a similar chemical structure and therefore cross-allergy is common. Thus, by becoming aware of the LTP of cannabis, it is possible to become allergic by a mechanism of cross-allergy to the other LTPs present in fruits and vegetables. This syndrome is referred to as cannabis-fruit-vegetable syndrome.

Intravenous administration of cannabis and lethal anaphylaxis

Cannabis allergy appears to be increasing. A 33-year-old woman is reported who collapsed and died shortly after injecting herself with a cannabis solution prepared by pouring boiling water onto plant material. There were no significant findings at autopsy, except for a single recent venepuncture wound in the left cubital fossa. Toxicological examination of the blood revealed low levels of methylamphetamine and amphetamine with tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ⁹-THC) and 11-nor-9-carboxy-Δ⁹-THC, and no opiates. The syringe used by the decedent contained Δ⁹-THC. Serum tryptase levels were markedly elevated (>200 µg/L; N < 12 µg/L). This finding coupled with the sudden collapse after injecting an aqueous extract of cannabis indicated a likely anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reaction to the extract. Cannabis allergy may occur following handling, inhalation, swallowing or injecting Cannabis sativa plants or their products. The possibility of an allergic reaction should therefore be considered at autopsy in deaths where there has been recent contact with cannabis.

Cannabis sativa allergy: looking through the fog

IgE-mediated Cannabis (C. sativa, marihuana) allergy seems to be on the rise. Both active and passive exposure to cannabis allergens may trigger a C. sativa sensitization and/or allergy. The clinical presentation of a C. sativa allergy varies from mild to life-threatening reactions and often seems to depend on the route of exposure. In addition, sensitization to cannabis allergens can result in various cross-allergies, mostly for plant foods. This clinical entity, designated as the 'cannabis-fruit/vegetable syndrome', might also imply cross-reactivity with tobacco, natural latex and plant-food-derived alcoholic beverages. Hitherto, these cross-allergies are predominantly reported in Europe and appear mainly to rely upon cross-reactivity between nonspecific lipid transfer proteins or thaumatin-like proteins present in C. sativa and their homologues, ubiquitously distributed throughout plant kingdom. At present, diagnosis of cannabis-related allergies predominantly rests upon a thorough history completed with skin testing using native extracts from crushed buds and leaves. However, quantification of specific IgE antibodies and basophil activation tests can also be helpful to establish correct diagnosis. In the absence of a cure, treatment comprises absolute avoidance measures. Whether avoidance of further use will halt the extension of related cross-allergies remains uncertain.

Cannabis Allergy: What do We Know Anno 2015

For about a decade, IgE-mediated cannabis (marihuana) allergy seems to be on the rise. Both active and passive exposure to cannabis allergens may lead to a cannabis sensitization and/or allergy. The clinical manifestations of a cannabis allergy can vary from mild to life-threatening reactions, often depending on the route of exposure. In addition, sensitization to cannabis allergens can trigger various secondary cross-allergies, mostly for plant-derived food. This clinical entity, which we have designated as the "cannabis-fruit/vegetable syndrome" might also imply cross-reactivity with tobacco, latex and plant-food derived alcoholic beverages. These secondary cross-allergies are mainly described in Europe and appear to result from cross-reactivity between non-specific lipid transfer proteins or thaumatin-like proteins present in Cannabis sativa and their homologues that are ubiquitously distributed throughout plant kingdom. At present, diagnosis of cannabis-related allergies rests upon a thorough history completed with skin testing using native extracts from buds and leaves. However, quantification of specific IgE antibodies and basophil activation tests can also be helpful to establish correct diagnosis. In the absence of a cure, treatment comprises absolute avoidance measures including a stop of any further cannabis (ab)use.

Prevalence of sensitization to Cannabis sativa. Lipid-transfer and thaumatin-like proteins are relevant allergens

BACKGROUND

Although allergy to Cannabis sativa was first reported over 40 years ago, the allergenicity has scarcely been studied. The objectives of this study were to investigate the frequency of sensitization to this plant, to analyze the clinical characteristics and allergenic profile of sensitized individuals and to identify the allergens involved.

METHODS

Five hundred and forty-five individuals in Spain attending allergy clinics with respiratory or cutaneous symptoms underwent a skin-prick test (SPT) with C. sativa leaf extract. The extract was characterized by SDS-PAGE and 2-dimensional electrophoresis. Specific IgE to C. sativa was measured in positive SPT individuals. The clinical and allergenic profiles of sensitized individuals were investigated and the most-recognized allergens sequenced and characterized by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

Of this preselected population, 44 individuals had positive SPT to C. sativa (prevalence 8.1%). Prevalence was higher in individuals who were C. sativa smokers (14.6%). Two individuals reported mild symptoms with C. sativa. Twenty-one individuals from 32 available sera (65.6%) had positive specific IgE to C. sativa. Twelve sera recognized at least 6 different bands in a molecular-weight range of between 10 and 60 kDa. Six of them recognized a 10-kDa band, identified as a lipid transfer protein (LTP) and 8 recognized a 38-kDa band, identified as a thaumatin-like protein.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a high prevalence of sensitization to C. sativa leaves. The clinical symptoms directly attributed to C. sativa were uncommon and mild. The sensitization profile observed suggests that C. sativa sensitization may be mediated by two mechanisms, i.e. cross-reactivity, mainly with LTP and thaumatin-like protein, and exposure-related 'de novo' sensitization.

Characterization of Cannabis sativa allergens

BACKGROUND

Allergic sensitization to Cannabis sativa is rarely reported, but the increasing consumption of marijuana has resulted in an increase in the number of individuals who become sensitized. To date, little is known about the causal allergens associated with C sativa.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize marijuana allergens in different components of the C sativa plant using serum IgE from marijuana sensitized patients.

METHODS

Serum samples from 23 patients with a positive skin prick test result to a crude C sativa extract were evaluated. IgE reactivity was variable between patients and C sativa extracts. IgE reactivity to C sativa proteins in Western blots was heterogeneous and ranged from 10 to 70 kDa. Putative allergens derived from 2-dimensional gels were identified.

RESULTS

Prominent IgE reactive bands included a 23-kDa oxygen-evolving enhancer protein 2 and a 50-kDa protein identified to be the photosynthetic enzyme ribulose-1,5-bisphosphate carboxylase/oxygenase. Additional proteins were identified in the proteomic analysis, including those from adenosine triphosphate synthase, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase, phosphoglycerate kinase, and luminal binding protein (heat shock protein 70), suggesting these proteins are potential allergens. Deglycosylation studies helped refine protein allergen identification and demonstrated significant IgE antibodies against plant oligosaccharides that could help explain cross-reactivity.

CONCLUSION

Identification and characterization of allergens from C sativa may be helpful in further understanding allergic sensitization to this plant species.

Allergic hypersensitivity to cannabis in patients with allergy and illicit drug users

BACKGROUND

Cannabis is the illicit drug most widely used by young people in high-income countries. Allergy symptoms have only occasionally been reported as one of the adverse health effects of cannabis use.

OBJECTIVES

To study IgE-mediated response to cannabis in drug users, atopic patients, and healthy controls.

METHODS

Asthmatic patients sensitised to pollen, and all patients sensitised to tobacco, tomato and latex, considered as cross-reacting allergens, were selected from a data base of 21,582 patients. Drug users attending a drug-rehabilitation clinic were also included. Controls were 200 non-atopic blood donors. Specific IgE determination, prick tests and specific challenge with cannabis extracts were performed in patients and controls.

RESULTS

Overall, 340 patients, mean age 26.9±10.7 years, were included. Males (61.4%) were the most sensitised to cannabis (p<0.001). All cannabis-sensitised patients were alcohol users. Eighteen (72%) of the patients allergic to tomato were sensitised to cannabis, but a positive specific challenge to cannabis was highest in patients sensitised to tobacco (13/21, 61.9%), (p<0.001). Pollen allergy was not a risk factor for cannabis sensitisation. Prick tests and IgE for cannabis had a good sensitivity (92 and 88.1%, respectively) and specificity (87.1 and 96%) for cannabis sensitisation.

CONCLUSIONS

Cannabis may be an important allergen in young people. Patients previously sensitised to tobacco or tomato are at risk. Cannabis prick tests and IgE were useful in detecting sensitisation.

IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions to cannabis in laboratory personnel

BACKGROUND

There have been sporadic reports of hypersensitivity reactions to plants of the Cannabinaceae family (hemp and hops), but it has remained unclear whether these reactions are immunologic or nonimmunologic in nature.

OBJECTIVE

We examined the IgE-binding and histamine-releasing properties of hashish and marijuana extracts by CAP-FEIA and a basophil histamine release test.

METHODS

Two workers at a forensic laboratory suffered from nasal congestion, rhinitis, sneezing and asthmatic symptoms upon occupational contact with hashish or marijuana, which they had handled frequently for 25 and 16 years, respectively. Neither patient had a history of atopic disease. Serum was analyzed for specific IgE antibodies to hashish or marijuana extract by research prototype ImmunoCAP, and histamine release from basophils upon exposure to hashish or marijuana extracts was assessed. Results were matched to those of 4 nonatopic and 10 atopic control subjects with no known history of recreational or occupational exposure to marijuana or hashish.

RESULTS

Patient 1 had specific IgE to both hashish and marijuana (CAP class 2), and patient 2 to marijuana only (CAP class 2). Controls proved negative for specific IgE except for 2 atopic individuals with CAP class 1 to marijuana and 1 other atopic individual with CAP class 1 to hashish. Stimulation of basophils with hashish or marijuana extracts elicited histamine release from basophils of both patients and 4 atopic control subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest an IgE-related pathomechanism for hypersensitivity reactions to marijuana or hashish.

In vitro cross-reactivity between tomato and other plant allergens

BACKGROUND

Cross-reactivity among fruits and different pollen and fruit species has been extensively reported.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the in vitro cross-reactivity between tomato and pollen, fruit, and latex extracts and to identify the proteins involved.

METHODS

A serum pool was prepared from 18 individuals residing on the Spanish Mediterranean coast (9 men and 9 women; mean [SD] age, 27.4 [10.1] years) who had positive skin prick test reactions to tomato peel. Extracts from 10 pollens, 12 fruits, and latex were tested. Levels of specific IgE to each extract were measured. The allergenic profile was evaluated by means of immunoblot. The percentage of inhibition between extracts and tomato peel extract was analyzed by means of CAP inhibition, and the allergens implicated were elucidated by immunoblot inhibition.

RESULTS

For pollens, the highest specific IgE values were obtained for grasses. Most pollen extracts showed a capacity of inhibition similar to that of tomato peel extract; high percentages were obtained with Artemisia vulgaris and Poa pratensis. The most strongly inhibited allergens in tomato corresponded to bands of 32 and 45 kDa. For fruits, the highest value of specific IgE was detected for peach. High percentages of inhibition were obtained with peach and hazelnut. No inhibition was detected with latex. Peach, chestnut, and melon inhibited high molecular weight bands (32 and 45 kDa) and a band of approximately 10 kDa.

CONCLUSIONS

Cross-reactivity between tomato and pollen and fruit extracts has been demonstrated. Allergens with a high molecular weight range seem to be responsible in pollen extracts. A 10-kDa band seems to be responsible in Platanus acerifolia, Salsola kali, peach, chestnut, and melon.